Why don't I see love from many American Christians?

[FireDragon76]

I completely agree that morality is not exclusive to Christians. I would argue that everyone has morality--even those we may consider to be amoral people. But I also said a Christian should not allow themselves to be manipulated by a non-Christian's judgment of them.

I don't think good judgment is the exclusive purview of Christians.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

To the best of my limited knowledge:

In the UK there s a welfare system and a progressive Anglican church advocating for the poor. IN the USA there is 'no free lunch', and a more evalgelically minded approach. Maybe some "Hebraism" too, in that signs of favour are seen in worldly advantage.

Some "footstool mentality" creeps in too, its a sign of favour to be in power.

"The pit" (sheol) is the place where god sends the unglodly in the bible. The pit in the USA is different to that in the UK. The means of access are different, the means of escape are different, and also the perceived status of pit dwellers is different.

Its part of a religious class system. And there is the sociology of the pit.

In the UK its a case of someone to be helped, preached to, and prayed for. In the USA its apparenly more like, look you're a sinner and you wouldn't be there excepting your unglodly ways so more the fool you...

Also in the US there is no established state media, so any sense of value is lensed through a free market capitalist paradigms. Because boardrooms put profit first, that's a sense of "Gods will" in that it is the localised setting God works within. And faith matters are perceived in relation to the status quo in each of the two countries (USA and UK).

So providence kind of works differently in each country, because of the systems leading to the pit or to success differ, and the faith based responses to these (ie providential mechanisms) reflect these cross cultural differences? And these values inevitably "leak into" the faith and are absolutized in a kind of hasty generalisation rather than being countextually understood.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

And yet again, you claim to be following the example of Jesus and the disciples when you seek conflict, yet completely ignore their constant insistance on humility, compassion, tolerance and love. Perhaps if you spent more time listening to them and less time trying to imitate their achievements, you would reflect their message more appropriately.

I have tried to help you. You choose to stand in your ignorance. Maybe God will bless you before you die to see your ignorance. If not, then you will have to deal with what you don't believe when you think you won't. But, I am no longer going to waste my time responding. It is clear that you can't hear what I have told you over and over again.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

I don't think good judgment is the exclusive purview of Christians.

So then, you don't agree with Jesus, right? Jesus said: "nobody is good except God" (Mar 10:18). Jesus said "Judge not according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgement." (John 7:24). How can someone without the Holy Spirit judge with righteous judgement? I certainly understand that someone can make a judgement that is consistent with God's judgement on a given issue; but that doesn't make their judgement good. In the case of the original poster, how can you, a professing christian, declare his judgment good when he refuses to believe in God?

 

[Kentonio]

I have tried to help you. You choose to stand in your ignorance. Maybe God will bless you before you die to see your ignorance. If not, then you will have to deal with what you don't believe when you think you won't. But, I am no longer going to waste my time responding. It is clear that you can't hear what I have told you over and over again.

You haven't tried to help me in the slightest, you've smugly insulted me, called me ignorant and lorded it over me with your self-perceived superiority based on your religious conversion.

Just a little hint, if you want to convert people when perhaps you should try and exhibit positive behaviour that makes others want to be more like you, rather than insult them and use threats of some post-life punishment to try and convince them that your religion is a positive thing.

 

[FireDragon76]

So then, you don't agree with Jesus, right? Jesus said: "nobody is good except God" (Mar 10:18). Jesus said "Judge not according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgement." (John 7:24). How can someone without the Holy Spirit judge with righteous judgement?

It seems to me you just grab some Bible verses haphazardly and string them together and expect me to take you seriously? I don't think so.

Jesus did not deny that people were incapable of doing good (Matthew 7:11). In addition, my religious tradition does have the concept of civil righteousness, which is simply a matter of being a reasonable human being, and has nothing to do with being a Christian. It does not earn us a place in heaven but it would be a mistake to deny that human beings are capable of doing any kind of good.

 

[Strathos]

I think the issue is the definition of the word 'good'. There are different standards for it, and man can't live up to God's standard.

 

[PreviouslySeeking...]

"Love" isn't an American value.

American evangelicals & conservatives tie up a lot of nationalism and prosperity gospel with their religious fervor. Love doesn't track. Certainly not gentle love. They like the "this is going to hurt me more than you" w/ a Bible in one hand and a switch in the other kind of love.

Basically, sinners & needy people are petulant children who need to be smacked into not sinning/being needy. It is justified by hell - after all, no earthly abuse or deprivation compares to hell- so if they can bully someone into righteousness- the ends justifies the means.

 

[zephcom]

Christianity, as a religion, is ultimately about faith in a person, not the kind of lifestyle one lives.

So if Jesus taught a kind of lifestyle and Christianity, as a religion, is ultimately about faith in a person, not the kind of lifestyle one lives...would that make Christianity one of the false teachers that Jesus warned His followers to beware of?

 

[Bobber]

They didn't judge, they always forgave, and they were just basically better people than most of us.

What do you mean they didn't judge? They didn't judge about anything? You know that Jesus talked about judging in two different ways.

1) Judge not lest you be judged Matt 7:1-3.... and

2) Judge righteous judgements John 7: 24

Are you aware of that? Do you know there is a difference between the two type of judging? One is good and the other is not?

Then I see so many American 'evangelicals' or conservative Christians who seem to spent their lives judging others, attacking their perceived enemies and embodying a message that seems to revolve around a love of wealth, power and hostility towards those who are weak and needy.

Hostility towards those who are weak and needy. I suppose you need to explain that.

Yet I see people quoting random passages and twisting them to somehow say its ok to support violence or war,

I'd say in the Christian community there's much debate about that. Is it right, wrong, sometimes right. Perhaps not always an easy answer.

aspire to prosperity

Motives of the heart are the thing to look at. At times even the work of God takes funds to sustain it as in a gathering of believers wanting to build a church. If they don't have means and never talk about aspiring to some level of prosperity they'll go knocking on the door of a secular institution called a bank and take a loan with usury.

and judge others for their sins rather than leave it to god. It confuses me.

Are they always condemning others or rather trying to help them recover themselves from the darkness their in? If your perception of a good Christian is NEVER to ever even hint on a subject that a person might need to make an adjustment in their lives and it's not a Christian thing to do well Jesus did. He brought up to the woman at the well of Samaria in a loving way, "Go and call your husband!" John 4 He knew she was not married to the one she was with and ended up telling her so BUT not in a condemning way.

Jesus said to another man, "Later Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, "See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you." John 5:14 The woman caught in an act of adultery he did the same thing as well by saying neither to I condemn you but go and sin no more. John 8:11 There are times if a Christian is seeking to help someone will have to tell them the truth, no in a condemning way but the truth none the less. Read through the writings of Paul and Timothy. They both pointed out sometimes people need to be exhorted or reproved and yes at times even rebuked.

How did the message of a man who said "But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them" somehow end up being used to support gun ownership, a strong military and the use of violence against others?

Well you might be making a good point there but Americans (of which I'm not) do have a history of believing their second amendment rights are there's to ensue that liberty will be maintained. I'm guessing sometimes this gun ownership is more of a thing coming from their feeling of their rights as a citizen not having given a lot of thought of just allowing someone to take their goods and being joyful about it. But tell me. Can you honestly tell me that European type Christians would just freely allow themselves to be taken advantage of and not rise up and retaliate in any way shape or form even from a legal standpoint?

 

[rjs330]

Yes, having eyes and a brain (that according to you, god gave me) gives me just as much capability to read and understand a written narrative as you have. What do I see in the New Testament of the Bible? I see a central character who reinforces over and over and over again that love, humility, compassion, acceptance of others and tolerance are the only route to god.

Why don’t I see any of those attributes when I read the posts of a born again Christian who instead drips anger, contempt and self-perceived superiority with every word? It’s noticeable that I haven’t attacked Christinity in any way in this thread, merely questioned why the behavior of some believers seems so wildly out of sync with the book they claim to follow. I certainly didn’t single out any individual or sect that should have caused you to feel I was talking about you. Yet despite this you’ve spoken to me purely with hostility and contempt. Can you quote me the section of the Bible where Jesus said that was acceptable behavior please?

Jesus himself is an example.
Then Yeshua began to denounce the towns in which he had done most of his miracles, because the people had not turned from their sins to God.“Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Beit-Tzaidah! Why, if the miracles done in you had been done in Tzor and Tzidon, they would long ago have put on sackcloth and ashes as evidence that they had changed their ways.But I tell you it will be more bearable for Tzor and Tzidon than for you on the Day of Judgment!And you, K’far-Nachum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Sh’ol! For if the miracles done in you had been done in S’dom, it would still be in existence today.But I tell you that on the Day of Judgment it will be more bearable for the land of S’dom than for you!” - Matthew 11:20-24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew11:20-24&version=CJB

You see it's easy to like the "nice" Jesus, but he also was the hard hitting Jesus at times. If you only like the nice Jesus you are missing 1/2 the truth.

 

[zephcom]

Jesus himself is an example.
Then Yeshua began to denounce the towns in which he had done most of his miracles, because the people had not turned from their sins to God.“Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Beit-Tzaidah! Why, if the miracles done in you had been done in Tzor and Tzidon, they would long ago have put on sackcloth and ashes as evidence that they had changed their ways.But I tell you it will be more bearable for Tzor and Tzidon than for you on the Day of Judgment!And you, K’far-Nachum, will you be exalted to heaven? No, you will be brought down to Sh’ol! For if the miracles done in you had been done in S’dom, it would still be in existence today.But I tell you that on the Day of Judgment it will be more bearable for the land of S’dom than for you!” - Matthew 11:20-24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew11:20-24&version=CJB

You see it's easy to like the "nice" Jesus, but he also was the hard hitting Jesus at times. If you only like the nice Jesus you are missing 1/2 the truth.

Hmmm. Glad I don't live in those towns. I would not like to be judged on the actions of a whole town or even a nation. If that were the true method of judgment, Americans would be screwed.

And I bet it would FAR less than half the truth if I only like the nice Jesus. However there does seem to be a lot of people who only like the bad Jesus. I wonder why that is.....

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

It seems to me you just grab some Bible verses haphazardly and string them together and expect me to take you seriously? I don't think so.

Jesus did not deny that people were incapable of doing good (Matthew 7:11). In addition, my religious tradition does have the concept of civil righteousness, which is simply a matter of being a reasonable human being, and has nothing to do with being a Christian. It does not earn us a place in heaven but it would be a mistake to deny that human beings are capable of doing any kind of good.

Wow, I wonder what you would have done with the Apostle Peter, if you were there for his Acts 2 address or Jesus for that matter--who would have randomly appeared to pull verses? And, just like Jesus, Peter and Paul understood, you are free to listen to the message or not listen to the message. And you will be accountable for what you do with it.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Hmmm. Glad I don't live in those towns. I would not like to be judged on the actions of a whole town or even a nation. If that were the true method of judgment, Americans would be screwed.

And I bet it would FAR less than half the truth if I only like the nice Jesus. However there does seem to be a lot of people who only like the bad Jesus. I wonder why that is.....

There isn't a "bad" Jesus and a "good" Jesus. There is ONE JESUS who is completely united with the ONE FATHER! It is the same Jesus that pronounced woes on the pharisees and towns and who said things that people found difficult to hear as the one who did and said things that people loved to hear. You can't pick and choose. There is nobody who prefers the tough sayings, we just don't believe in the false Gospel where people eliminate those things they and others don't like to create a following, finances, and false disciples who come to God for the wrong reasons.

 

[zephcom]

There isn't a "bad" Jesus and a "good" Jesus. There is ONE JESUS who is completely united with the ONE FATHER! It is the same Jesus that pronounced woes on the pharisees and towns and who said things that people found difficult to hear as the one who did and said things that people loved to hear. You can't pick and choose. There is nobody who prefers the tough sayings, we just don't believe in the false Gospel where people eliminate those things they and others don't like to create a following, finances, and false disciples who come to God for the wrong reasons.

First off, I didn't create the 'good' Jesus and the 'bad' Jesus. That was just a response to rjs330's 'nice' Jesus and 'hard hitting' Jesus.

Next, while it -is- possible that Jesus had a split personality I think people need to view the teachings of Jesus in the broad context of what His primary teaching was. And that requires people to understand His primary teaching of raising one's spirituality through the practice of Divine Love and self-sacrificial service to others.

Within that context, one can see that Jesus was not 'punishing' those cities because they rejected the miracles. Rather He was simply mourning their rejection of His message and their loss of spiritual advancement. After all, it is our own spiritual advancement which draws us closer to the Divine Love we know as God.

Finally, I respectfully reject your assertion that 'There is nobody who prefers the tough sayings'. The reality is there is an entire segment of Christianity which views those 'tough sayings' as authority for them to brow beat others and threaten others with damnation and hell-fire. The idea of each individual using Jesus' teachings to improve themselves through Divine Love for others and the practice of service to others even at the lost of their own benefit is totally lost on these people.

Their vision of a revengeful God who throws living humans into a Lake of Fire is all consuming. They bask in the knowledge of their own superiority without ever understanding Jesus' teaching that those who are first in this life will be last in the next life.

In Mark 9:33-35 is this teaching from Jesus:

33 They came to Capernaum. When he was in the house, he asked them, “What were you arguing about on the road?” 34 But they kept quiet because on the way they had argued about who was the greatest.

35 Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, “Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.”

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

First off, I didn't create the 'good' Jesus and the 'bad' Jesus. That was just a response to rjs330's 'nice' Jesus and 'hard hitting' Jesus.

Next, while it -is- possible that Jesus had a split personality I think people need to view the teachings of Jesus in the broad context of what His primary teaching was. And that requires people to understand His primary teaching of raising one's spirituality through the practice of Divine Love and self-sacrificial service to others.

Within that context, one can see that Jesus was not 'punishing' those cities because they rejected the miracles. Rather He was simply mourning their rejection of His message and their loss of spiritual advancement. After all, it is our own spiritual advancement which draws us closer to the Divine Love we know as God.

Finally, I respectfully reject your assertion that 'There is nobody who prefers the tough sayings'. The reality is there is an entire segment of Christianity which views those 'tough sayings' as authority for them to brow beat others and threaten others with damnation and hell-fire. The idea of each individual using Jesus' teachings to improve themselves through Divine Love for others and the practice of service to others even at the lost of their own benefit is totally lost on these people.

Their vision of a revengeful God who throws living humans into a Lake of Fire is all consuming. They bask in the knowledge of their own superiority without ever understanding Jesus' teaching that those who are first in this life will be last in the next life.

In Mark 9:33-35 is this teaching from Jesus:

33 They came to Capernaum. When he was in the house, he asked them, “What were you arguing about on the road?” 34 But they kept quiet because on the way they had argued about who was the greatest.

35 Sitting down, Jesus called the Twelve and said, “Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.”

But, see, you choose the lens you look through that enables you to view some things Jesus said on a lower level than the others. But, what if you viewed everything He said on the same level. It can be done. God would have been fully capable of inspiring Scripture without a requirement to numb out the things you don't like, if He wanted to. For instance, Jesus could have said "God so loved the world that He sent me to save everyone--even those who choose not to believe--because God created everyone." But, sadly for the universalists, He didn't say that. Jesus didn't have to say things about weeping and gnashing of teeth, being in outer darkness, or hell. Jesus didn't have to tell the story of the rich man and Lazarus the way He did, but He did. Jesus didn't have to paint the picture in His Revelation to John that He did. But, He did. Jesus didn't have to tell the parables He did or share the meanings He shared. BUT HE DID! So, to try to see a big picture devoid of those things is fooling yourself.

 

[zephcom]

But, see, you choose the lens you look through that enables you to view some things Jesus said on a lower level than the others. But, what if you viewed everything He said on the same level. It can be done. God would have been fully capable of inspiring Scripture without a requirement to numb out the things you don't like, if He wanted to. For instance, Jesus could have said "God so loved the world that He sent me to save everyone--even those who choose not to believe--because God created everyone." But, sadly for the universalists, He didn't say that. Jesus didn't have to say things about weeping and gnashing of teeth, being in outer darkness, or hell. Jesus didn't have to tell the story of the rich man and Lazarus the way He did, but He did. Jesus didn't have to paint the picture in His Revelation to John that He did. But, He did. Jesus didn't have to tell the parables He did or share the meanings He shared. BUT HE DID! So, to try to see a big picture devoid of those things is fooling yourself.

You do appear to be confusing the teachings of Jesus with the sayings of mere humans. For instance, JOHN said the passage in John 3:16, not Jesus.

The teachings of Jesus are confined to the direct quotes of Jesus and not to the commentary of human authors. And most certainly one can not attribute to Jesus any quote that originates from Revelation. The structure of the entire book testifies to the fact that it is only a 'vision' reported by an unidentified writer. We don't accept 'visions' reported by people today as being direct quotes of Jesus. There is no reason to accept one from the end of the First Century that way.

I understand that there is a trend within Christianity which teaches that the entire Bible is the result of Jesus or God Himself. That the Bible contains errors demonstrates that the belief is clearly false since anything penned by God or Jesus would be perfect given their Divine nature...right?

I accept the quoted sayings of Jesus as found in the Gospels as accurate depictions of His teaching. The rest I view as commentary by humans. And that is a reasonable assessment of the construction of the Bible.

Why is my position important? It is because elevating all of the writings found in the Bible to Divine Revelation only serves to diminish the actual teachings of Jesus. It is my opinion that teaching the Divine nature of ALL of the writing in the Bible was done deliberately to enable leaders of the religion to diminish Jesus' teachings and elevate the commentary of humans.

There is a world of difference between saying "Jesus" said "For God so loved the world..." and saying someone anonymous who we prefer to call John, said "For God so loved the world....". It is the difference between Divine revelation and human opinion.

And that is a HUGE difference.

 

[Holoman]

You do appear to be confusing the teachings of Jesus with the sayings of mere humans. For instance, JOHN said the passage in John 3:16, not Jesus.

The teachings of Jesus are confined to the direct quotes of Jesus and not to the commentary of human authors. And most certainly one can not attribute to Jesus any quote that originates from Revelation. The structure of the entire book testifies to the fact that it is only a 'vision' reported by an unidentified writer. We don't accept 'visions' reported by people today as being direct quotes of Jesus. There is no reason to accept one from the end of the First Century that way.

I understand that there is a trend within Christianity which teaches that the entire Bible is the result of Jesus or God Himself. That the Bible contains errors demonstrates that the belief is clearly false since anything penned by God or Jesus would be perfect given their Divine nature...right?

I accept the quoted sayings of Jesus as found in the Gospels as accurate depictions of His teaching. The rest I view as commentary by humans. And that is a reasonable assessment of the construction of the Bible.

Why is my position important? It is because elevating all of the writings found in the Bible to Divine Revelation only serves to diminish the actual teachings of Jesus. It is my opinion that teaching the Divine nature of ALL of the writing in the Bible was done deliberately to enable leaders of the religion to diminish Jesus' teachings and elevate the commentary of humans.

There is a world of difference between saying "Jesus" said "For God so loved the world..." and saying someone anonymous who we prefer to call John, said "For God so loved the world....". It is the difference between Divine revelation and human opinion.

And that is a HUGE difference.

So if you believe the quotes of Jesus are correct, do you believe in his resurrection, or that he was the son of God? Just wondering.

If so, what do you make of the fact that Jesus frequently referred to the Old Testament as if it was God's word/law?

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus the Christ also overturned tables and took a whip He formed Himself, to the money changers in the Temple, to drive them out.

It was not the foundation of His efforts.

 

[SkyWriting]

Growing up in the UK,

Its common for children to wear rose colored glasses, from a good home.